3 ms·
Why would you want to do this? It doesn't make it faster than JavaScript. You'd still need to interface with JavaScript Web API bindings, which means you'd need
by andrewmcwatters 10y ago
Why would you want to do this? It doesn't make it faster than JavaScript. You'd still need to interface with JavaScript Web API bindings, which means you'd need C++ bindings to JavaScript bindings, which... use C++...
You can _currently_ do this without WebAssembly, but there's zero point to it.
- shanwang 10y agook, so the main usage of emscripten is to compile C++ to javascript and then call them from the "normal" frontend javascript code? ie. most UI related frontend job will still be coded in javascript? As to the question why, C++ is not only about runtime performance, it's a more mature language than javascript/typescript and there are powerful data structure/design patterns/algorithms that are missing from javascript. Of course I see it this way because I'm way more competent in C++ than javascript.
- andrewmcwatters 10y agoI definitely appreciate that being a C and C++ developer, but you're sorely misled if you think that runtime carries over. Emscripten just translates the language to something usable through asm.js with a similar execution flow, but you end up running JavaScript. That's what it compiles to. Even WebAssembly is designed to run something that is consumed by the very same JavaScript runtime.
- shanwang 10y agoAre you sure about WebAssembly? I thought it's a new byte code standard and a completely new runtime on its own.
- andrewmcwatters 10y agoYeah, it's designed to pass through the same mechanisms that handle JavaScript. It's a new byte code standard afaik, too, but one that's used in those systems.